Michael Crichton was launched into space by the CIA (go the CIA!) to plant a fungus ("plant" a fungus?) on MIR.
Hopefully they'll deorbit Crichton and release him into the goddamn atmosphere.* I sure am sick of his movie novels that open with a good premise, become amazingly predictable within two chapters, and dare you to read them all the way through the same way your buddies in college dared you to drink an entire bottle of ketchup.
First off, you've just contradicted yourself. Even assuming that you're "ain't ain't a word" statement is valid (which obviously it isn't, so we can assume you're just being a smartass), the fact that you recognize it as a negative (hence your "double negative") indicates that it is a word, at least as far as you are concerned.
Second, "ain't" is a word. It's a contraction for "am not" that was valid for a long damned time, and has fallen out of favor (and is often thought invalid) because it was often used improperly. Hence, "I ain't going to put up with this." is a perfectly valid sentence, whereas "You ain't got a damn clue." is not.
So, while he used "ain't" incorrectly, your assertion that it's not even a word is no more correct.
For reference, see the dictionary.com entry. (Go dictionary.com! Way to not suck!)
I have a TNT2 in a Zip-Loc bag in my closet. It ended up there when I finally got sick of waiting for Nvidia to deliver on their promise of solid Linux drivers.
Hmm... I've heard bad things about Cobalt's boxes, particularly in the area of security. (I *know* they used to be really bad about security... idunno about now, though.)
You get bonus points for the Modest Mouse sig, though.;)
Yeah, it blew my mind, too. In fact, it was so mind-blowing I failed the course the first time through, largely due to my lack of understanding of that energy-well stuff. Truth be told, I still don't know what the hell an energy well is.
Of course, all that relativity stuff came easy after having read so many sci-fi books about space travel (particularly Speaker for the Dead). I breezed through that stuff.;)
Well, that was a fairly rambling and pointless post. Thank you.
In answer to your question: I care. I find it interesting that the program that runs most of the DNS for the Internet has hit a new major version number after being in 8.x since 1997. This is stuff that matters.
He didn't confuse anything. He replied to yibyab's statement that he was not a Courtney Love fan, saying that he (CmdrTaco) was and saying why, and he commented on her lawsuit as a separate issue.
Two completely separate issues. I had no trouble reading the post as such.
The problem with filtering software is that it does not just filter porn. If it attempts to, it will be completely ineffective even at that. Pretty much everyone agrees now (some having been forced to the agreement) that this is the case.
Now, the pro-filter camp would argue that the way around that problem is for children to have separate access to the library's resources, perhaps in the form of different library cards which entail filtering, etc. This is not much better. Now we're talking about the same problems as general filtering, only applied specifically to children whose parents have chosen it, as opposed to everyone. That way, see, we shouldn't care. Because as long as our access to information isn't affected, why should we care, right?
Well, here's my thought (and get ready for some controversy). I want your child to have access to information on breast cancer. That's right! I don't give a damn whether or not you think it's obscene, and I don't care whether you have to stand there and make sure he doesn't accidentally pull some porn. IMO, you should be teaching your child your values and turning him loose to stick to them or not, as he chooses. If you're even halfway decent at the whole parenting thing, you'll have little to worry about.
But perhaps even more than that, I don't want you to put filters in our public libraries. If that means you have to supervise your children, so be it. It's not even a matter of my not wanting to raise your children, or caring whether you raise them yourself or not. It's just that I have this idea (call me a romantic) of the public library as a place of knowledge and understanding, a place dedicated to the spread of information and ideas. Filtering software in a library is, IMO, profane.
I want to live in a world where people are open-minded and accepting of each other's ideas and opinions. I want to live in a world where knowledge flows like wine, to be drunk deeply of by any who would, and where none (including parents) think well of withholding the cup for fear it might contain a speck of dirt. Unfortunately, I'm something of a realist, and I know that such a world is unlikely at best. But I'll be damned if I'm going to quietly allow some paranoid fools corrupt one of the few purely good institutions we've built.
The original source
code for any of those driver binaries can be found thousands of sites all across the 'Net.
I'm not at all sure how relevant this is to the discussion, but I should point out that according the the GPL, the distributor of a binary built from GPLed source must make the source available as well. Pointing to someone else who makes the source available doesn't cut it. I can't just sling Linux kernels around and say "you can get the source at kernel.org"; I have to make that source available myself.
Nobody ever died when an mp3 accidentally went off. The death rate due to violent crime (note: not the same thing as the rate of violent crime, which has changed little) didn't increase astronomically with the propagation of the mp3 in urban areas. Guns are inherently dangerous; mp3s are not. Don't confuse that with a moral issue.
You raise the point that encryption is difficult over wireless because anyone can listen, and say that "you can't just send a PGP key with this, because potentially, anyone could 'see' it."
The thing about public key encryption, though, is that anyone can see the public key... On a two-way communication system, what happens is one peer generates a key pair and sends its public key to the other, which then does the same. When you encrypt a message with someone's public key, it can only be decrypted using their private key, which only they have. (The private key is never transmitted.) So the two peers use each other's public key to encrypt messages to each other.
That's what makes PKE so cool, IMO. You need never transmit a secret, so even if someone's listening in when you send your key, all they can do is encrypt messages to you, not decrypt messages from you.
coulda sworn I quoted him there. oh well. still, my point was valid... it just took a little bit more reading ability (say, 4th grade) than I remembered.
Not true. Read his first sentence, in which he accuses credit card companies of covering up this policy and propagating the idea that the consumer is liable, despite the contrary being true.
That is the statement I was addressing, which should have been obvious as I quoted it.
I'm sure I don't even have to point out the irony of your calling me a "thickheaded nitwit".
So where's the public key? And what has this bought you, at all? If you can't decrypt these numbers without the private key, which exists only on the non-networked machine, then why store them in encrypted form on a networked machine at all? They're not just useless to an intruder in that form, they're useless to you, too.
This is a very elaborate scheme you've cooked up, but its only advantage seems to be having the numbers stored on a non-networked machine, which could be done without the encryption and all the other hoops you have the merchant jumping through.
(Now if you used one of those silly "ATM + 'credit' card things" that lets people irreversably take
money out of your bank account you'd better think again...)
Ummm... no. My card, at least, when used as a credit card, carries nearly the same consumer protection a normal credit card does.
I've NEVER heard from a credit card company that the consumer would be held liable. In fact, if I recall, most have used the non-liability of a customer in the event of credit card theft as a selling point for their card.
Odd. I have a PCG-Z505R, and I've accidentally drop-kicked it (repeatedly), yanked the power cord out (repeatedly), banged it into wall corners (repeatedly), and just generally abused the hell out of it.
The results: I knocked off a hinge cover (purely cosmetic, it seems) when I gave it a particularly hard drop-kick into a wall (cables are meant for tripping over), and the ethernet dongle is pretty much shot. Also, I can hear the hard drive a lot more now... kinda loud, actually.
But it's working just fine, and certainly hasn't blown up or melted down yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, no it doesn't. If I didn't know the specs on the B&W G3, I'd have to go look it up if I wanted to compare to my system.
Michael Crichton was launched into space by the CIA (go the CIA!) to plant a fungus ("plant" a fungus?) on MIR.
Hopefully they'll deorbit Crichton and release him into the goddamn atmosphere.* I sure am sick of his movie novels that open with a good premise, become amazingly predictable within two chapters, and dare you to read them all the way through the same way your buddies in college dared you to drink an entire bottle of ketchup.
* Bonus points for reference-catching.
is an old-school, no shit ass-reaming flame.
Well done, Enoch!
Perhaps somewhere where its use doesn't imply the lack of fault or blame.
The real irony is that I typed "you're" instead of "your", while correcting someone about contractions. Oops.
Perhaps, but someone must stand up for poor, wronged "ain't" and defend it! ;)
Uh, oh, double negative.
There is such a thing as a free lunch.
And ain't ain't a word.
First off, you've just contradicted yourself. Even assuming that you're "ain't ain't a word" statement is valid (which obviously it isn't, so we can assume you're just being a smartass), the fact that you recognize it as a negative (hence your "double negative") indicates that it is a word, at least as far as you are concerned.
Second, "ain't" is a word. It's a contraction for "am not" that was valid for a long damned time, and has fallen out of favor (and is often thought invalid) because it was often used improperly. Hence, "I ain't going to put up with this." is a perfectly valid sentence, whereas "You ain't got a damn clue." is not.
So, while he used "ain't" incorrectly, your assertion that it's not even a word is no more correct.
For reference, see the dictionary.com entry. (Go dictionary.com! Way to not suck!)
I have a TNT2 in a Zip-Loc bag in my closet. It ended up there when I finally got sick of waiting for Nvidia to deliver on their promise of solid Linux drivers.
I'm now happily playing UT with my new Voodoo 3.
Hmm... I've heard bad things about Cobalt's boxes, particularly in the area of security. (I *know* they used to be really bad about security... idunno about now, though.)
;)
You get bonus points for the Modest Mouse sig, though.
This shit blows my mind.
;)
Yeah, it blew my mind, too. In fact, it was so mind-blowing I failed the course the first time through, largely due to my lack of understanding of that energy-well stuff. Truth be told, I still don't know what the hell an energy well is.
Of course, all that relativity stuff came easy after having read so many sci-fi books about space travel (particularly Speaker for the Dead). I breezed through that stuff.
umm... actually, the daemon is "named". BIND is a package that includes named as well as a resolving library and some other tools (like nslookup).
You probably knew that; I'm just posting to clarify for those who don't.
Well, that was a fairly rambling and pointless post. Thank you.
In answer to your question: I care. I find it interesting that the program that runs most of the DNS for the Internet has hit a new major version number after being in 8.x since 1997. This is stuff that matters.
He didn't confuse anything. He replied to yibyab's statement that he was not a Courtney Love fan, saying that he (CmdrTaco) was and saying why, and he commented on her lawsuit as a separate issue.
Two completely separate issues. I had no trouble reading the post as such.
The problem with filtering software is that it does not just filter porn. If it attempts to, it will be completely ineffective even at that. Pretty much everyone agrees now (some having been forced to the agreement) that this is the case.
Now, the pro-filter camp would argue that the way around that problem is for children to have separate access to the library's resources, perhaps in the form of different library cards which entail filtering, etc. This is not much better. Now we're talking about the same problems as general filtering, only applied specifically to children whose parents have chosen it, as opposed to everyone. That way, see, we shouldn't care. Because as long as our access to information isn't affected, why should we care, right?
Well, here's my thought (and get ready for some controversy). I want your child to have access to information on breast cancer. That's right! I don't give a damn whether or not you think it's obscene, and I don't care whether you have to stand there and make sure he doesn't accidentally pull some porn. IMO, you should be teaching your child your values and turning him loose to stick to them or not, as he chooses. If you're even halfway decent at the whole parenting thing, you'll have little to worry about.
But perhaps even more than that, I don't want you to put filters in our public libraries. If that means you have to supervise your children, so be it. It's not even a matter of my not wanting to raise your children, or caring whether you raise them yourself or not. It's just that I have this idea (call me a romantic) of the public library as a place of knowledge and understanding, a place dedicated to the spread of information and ideas. Filtering software in a library is, IMO, profane.
I want to live in a world where people are open-minded and accepting of each other's ideas and opinions. I want to live in a world where knowledge flows like wine, to be drunk deeply of by any who would, and where none (including parents) think well of withholding the cup for fear it might contain a speck of dirt. Unfortunately, I'm something of a realist, and I know that such a world is unlikely at best. But I'll be damned if I'm going to quietly allow some paranoid fools corrupt one of the few purely good institutions we've built.
The original source code for any of those driver binaries can be found thousands of sites all across the 'Net.
I'm not at all sure how relevant this is to the discussion, but I should point out that according the the GPL, the distributor of a binary built from GPLed source must make the source available as well. Pointing to someone else who makes the source available doesn't cut it. I can't just sling Linux kernels around and say "you can get the source at kernel.org"; I have to make that source available myself.
Dude, I'm still pretty psyched about PHP and my digital camera.
Nobody ever died when an mp3 accidentally went off. The death rate due to violent crime (note: not the same thing as the rate of violent crime, which has changed little) didn't increase astronomically with the propagation of the mp3 in urban areas. Guns are inherently dangerous; mp3s are not. Don't confuse that with a moral issue.
Umm... Nobody's really actively pursuing the arcology idea right now, and I don't think most people want to live in big domed city.
The domed city, I think, is one of science fiction's more pessimistic inventions, and doesn't seem at all likely.
(Note to self, when reading this archive in 60 years under a dome: way to predict the future, genius.)
You raise the point that encryption is difficult over wireless because anyone can listen, and say that "you can't just send a PGP key with this, because potentially, anyone could 'see' it."
The thing about public key encryption, though, is that anyone can see the public key... On a two-way communication system, what happens is one peer generates a key pair and sends its public key to the other, which then does the same. When you encrypt a message with someone's public key, it can only be decrypted using their private key, which only they have. (The private key is never transmitted.) So the two peers use each other's public key to encrypt messages to each other.
That's what makes PKE so cool, IMO. You need never transmit a secret, so even if someone's listening in when you send your key, all they can do is encrypt messages to you, not decrypt messages from you.
ugh. don't i feel stupid.
coulda sworn I quoted him there. oh well. still, my point was valid... it just took a little bit more reading ability (say, 4th grade) than I remembered.
Not true. Read his first sentence, in which he accuses credit card companies of covering up this policy and propagating the idea that the consumer is liable, despite the contrary being true.
That is the statement I was addressing, which should have been obvious as I quoted it.
I'm sure I don't even have to point out the irony of your calling me a "thickheaded nitwit".
So where's the public key? And what has this bought you, at all? If you can't decrypt these numbers without the private key, which exists only on the non-networked machine, then why store them in encrypted form on a networked machine at all? They're not just useless to an intruder in that form, they're useless to you, too.
This is a very elaborate scheme you've cooked up, but its only advantage seems to be having the numbers stored on a non-networked machine, which could be done without the encryption and all the other hoops you have the merchant jumping through.
(Now if you used one of those silly "ATM + 'credit' card things" that lets people irreversably take money out of your bank account you'd better think again...)
Ummm... no. My card, at least, when used as a credit card, carries nearly the same consumer protection a normal credit card does.
I've NEVER heard from a credit card company that the consumer would be held liable. In fact, if I recall, most have used the non-liability of a customer in the event of credit card theft as a selling point for their card.
Odd. I have a PCG-Z505R, and I've accidentally drop-kicked it (repeatedly), yanked the power cord out (repeatedly), banged it into wall corners (repeatedly), and just generally abused the hell out of it.
The results: I knocked off a hinge cover (purely cosmetic, it seems) when I gave it a particularly hard drop-kick into a wall (cables are meant for tripping over), and the ethernet dongle is pretty much shot. Also, I can hear the hard drive a lot more now... kinda loud, actually.
But it's working just fine, and certainly hasn't blown up or melted down yet.